5 ms·

It's not really some words, it's more like you won't be able to get more than a page out of it and even that is going to be so wrong it's basically a parody and

It's not really some words, it's more like you won't be able to get more than a page out of it and even that is going to be so wrong it's basically a parody and thus allowed.

angoragoats 2y ago
I’d love to see you try to defend this notion in court. Parody requires deliberate intent to be humorous. And courts have repeatedly held that changing the words of a copyrighted work while keeping the same general meaning can still be copyright infringement.
- throw5959 2y ago
  It's not just "changing some words". The majority of words will be different, sentences will be different. The general meaning might be generally the same, but I don't think that's enough to claim copyright protection.
  - angoragoats 2y ago
    I didn’t use the word “some.” Please don’t misquote me. As I said in the comment you’re replying to, there’s case law proving you wrong.
    - throw5959 2y ago
      Good thing that's not global, right? I'm not in the US, our courts work differently.
      - angoragoats 2y ago
        I’m sorry for assuming that you were (though you could have mentioned this in your reply). Most of the large AI companies relevant to our discussion are based in the US.
        throw5959 2y ago
        Will that remain true if they have copyright issues in the US?
        ben_w 2y ago
        (I'm not the other commenter) I suspect that most of the large AI companies relevant to this discussion will remain based in the US. Most of the money is in the US, China, and the EU. China won't allow any LLM that accidentally says mean things about their government, the EU is worried about AI that may harm individuals by libelling them. The Chinese models may well completely ignore western laws, but if they're on the other side of the Great Firewall, or indeed just have Chinese-language UIs and a focus on Chinese-language tokens in the training… well, I'm not 100% confident, but I would be somewhat surprised if, say, JK Rowling was upset upon discovering that western users attempting to pirate her works via a Chinese chatbot were getting a version of Harry Potter that begins with the title literally being "赫奇帕奇巫师石（哈利·波特与魔法石）" (as ChatGPT just told me the Chinese version starts. Google Translate claims the first three characters are "Hufflepuff"). Even if the rules aren't any harder (as I'm not a lawyer, I can't tell if the differences in copyright rules will or won't make a huge difference in compliance costs), it's likely easier for American companies to lobby the American government for what they want done to make business easier.
- CaffeineLD50 2y ago
  You could argue intent. The model has no intent to infringe. No mens rea. AI models will get broad federal immunity is my prediction for 2025. I'll bet DOGE coins on it.
  - angoragoats 2y ago
    AI models are not entities that can be sued, accused of a crime, or given legal immunity, to my knowledge. But I get the gist of what you’re saying.

It's not really some words, it's more like you won't be able to get more than a page out of it and even that is going to be so wrong it's basically a parody and thus allowed.

angoragoats 2y ago

I’d love to see you try to defend this notion in court. Parody requires deliberate intent to be humorous. And courts have repeatedly held that changing the words of a copyrighted work while keeping the same general meaning can still be copyright infringement.

throw5959 2y ago
It's not just "changing some words". The majority of words will be different, sentences will be different. The general meaning might be generally the same, but I don't think that's enough to claim copyright protection.
- angoragoats 2y ago
  I didn’t use the word “some.” Please don’t misquote me. As I said in the comment you’re replying to, there’s case law proving you wrong.
  - throw5959 2y ago
    Good thing that's not global, right? I'm not in the US, our courts work differently.
    - angoragoats 2y ago
      I’m sorry for assuming that you were (though you could have mentioned this in your reply). Most of the large AI companies relevant to our discussion are based in the US.
      - throw5959 2y ago
        Will that remain true if they have copyright issues in the US?
        ben_w 2y ago
        (I'm not the other commenter) I suspect that most of the large AI companies relevant to this discussion will remain based in the US. Most of the money is in the US, China, and the EU. China won't allow any LLM that accidentally says mean things about their government, the EU is worried about AI that may harm individuals by libelling them. The Chinese models may well completely ignore western laws, but if they're on the other side of the Great Firewall, or indeed just have Chinese-language UIs and a focus on Chinese-language tokens in the training… well, I'm not 100% confident, but I would be somewhat surprised if, say, JK Rowling was upset upon discovering that western users attempting to pirate her works via a Chinese chatbot were getting a version of Harry Potter that begins with the title literally being "赫奇帕奇巫师石（哈利·波特与魔法石）" (as ChatGPT just told me the Chinese version starts. Google Translate claims the first three characters are "Hufflepuff"). Even if the rules aren't any harder (as I'm not a lawyer, I can't tell if the differences in copyright rules will or won't make a huge difference in compliance costs), it's likely easier for American companies to lobby the American government for what they want done to make business easier.
CaffeineLD50 2y ago
You could argue intent. The model has no intent to infringe. No mens rea. AI models will get broad federal immunity is my prediction for 2025. I'll bet DOGE coins on it.
- angoragoats 2y ago
  AI models are not entities that can be sued, accused of a crime, or given legal immunity, to my knowledge. But I get the gist of what you’re saying.